3 minutes ago, Megatronrex said:

Those can be verified using alternative FAQs

While playing alternative Armada

"Alternate Armada" wasn't a very good game.

Or maybe you meant "Bizzaro Armada" instead?

those are kinda cool looking.

Starship Battles had miniatures that looked fine-to-good, but the scale was... well, it just wasn't. And the game played on a grid? For reasons? I guess? Also, generally not good. I sold all of mine (well, traded for even more miniatures for normal SWMiniatures) once I finally admitted that I loathed the game itself.

Star Wars Pocketmodels is a weird little game, with weird little pieces. It's pretty much a card game with some fancy looking "totally not just cards". The punch-out-and-build ships are done like the Pirates of the Spanish Main ships, but from "cards" closer in size to Armada ship cards. Sadly the "models" and positioning didn't mean much, as it was all "zone" based. Fun enough as a "light" game. I still have all of mine (though I only bought some of it, and even then only for the first... two? releases).

And, on topic, I'm sure they both had FAQs! That existed!

1 hour ago, Greatfrito said:

Or maybe you meant "Bizzaro Armada" instead?

The sliding scale here is even worse than FFG.

Of the three of these, Armada is the only one that even made an attempt at a consistent scale, "sliding" or not.

Frak! The word is totally Frak!

What i want to know is how the hell didn't issues that were immeditely at hand through spoilers or day 1 ie: Rapid Launch get picked up from months of testing...and there are many more

3 minutes ago, Trizzo2 said:

What i want to know is how the hell didn't issues that were immeditely at hand through spoilers or day 1 ie: Rapid Launch get picked up from months of testing...and there are many more

see Sato

8 minutes ago, Trizzo2 said:

What i want to know is how the hell didn't issues that were immeditely at hand through spoilers or day 1 ie: Rapid Launch get picked up from months of testing...and there are many more

This is fairly common. One thing with games like Armada and X-Wing and Imperial Assault is that they are using a "keyword" or "dictionary" system, where certain specific terms are used to describe specific actions. The issues arise when the terminology in the "dictionary" gets too specific, or the public at large uses a different definition. This is why you get concerns about Rapid Launch Bays, where a word is left out but it's unclear whether the lack of another dictionary term means that does or doesn't happen. In this case, the question is "if I deploy a squadron using Rapid Launch Bays, does it count as activating the squadron or is it done in place of activating the squadron?"

In a "dictionary" system, usually some of the terminology has to be revealed to players so that definitions remain consistent. That's why, for example, the game always refers to "you," "Friendly ship/squadron," "first player" and "second player" to define which players and ships act.

7 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

In a "dictionary" system, usually some of the terminology has to be revealed to players so that definitions remain consistent. That's why, for example, the game always refers to "you," "Friendly ship/squadron," "first player" and "second player" to define which players and ships act.

Yes, but that's one of the reasons why RLB is confusing is because the devs have never really made a consistent use of the word "you"[EDIT:] "(this) activation" on the upgrade cards. I know what it says in the rulebook, but I made a survey of all the other upgrade cards in the game and the use is inconsistent and now that we're thinking about it, unclear on other cards as well (i.e. Independence).

1 hour ago, Eggzavier said:

Yes, but that's one of the reasons why RLB is confusing is because the devs have never really made a consistent use of the word "you" on the upgrade cards. I know what it says in the rulebook, but I made a survey of all the other upgrade cards in the game and the use is inconsistent and now that we're thinking about it, unclear on other cards as well (i.e. Independence).

Wait... How is "you" used wrong on Indy? Off the top of my head, I don't know of any case in which "you" is used inconsistently...

And also, now that you bring it up, it occurs to me that I've seen people asking if, if you have two ships with RLB, if one ship can deploy another's set-aside squadrons. And the answer is no, because of the definition of "you."



RLB specifically ties set-aside squadrons to the ship, because

Quote

you may set aside... squadrons

and

Quote

you may instead place 1 of your set-aside squadrons.

1 hour ago, Eggzavier said:

Yes, but that's one of the reasons why RLB is confusing is because the devs have never really made a consistent use of the word "you" on the upgrade cards. I know what it says in the rulebook, but I made a survey of all the other upgrade cards in the game and the use is inconsistent and now that we're thinking about it, unclear on other cards as well (i.e. Independence).

It really shouldn't be this hard to do an FAQ though.

The wording "you" was clearly ruled and does not cause any problem. Not even on the Independence.

All you need to do is to think of the ship when it comes to you on the upgrades. And all is fine.

There are other keywords that are not ruled and cause some problems. Resolve is one of these. Especially when it comes within a step and not an effect (see G-8).

Sorry all - my memory failed me this morning.

(Disgraceful) (Need coffee) (Sad!)

It wasn't the "you" that I was taking issue with originally, it was the "(this) activation" that I think has been poorly defined and has been inconsistently used across cards and rules, where a word precedes the word 'activation' - is it the ship activation being referred to or the squadron activation being referred to? (What I meant when referring to Independence also.)

That'll teach me to sound off without checking and rechecking my argument.

Sorry for the confusion!

5 minutes ago, Eggzavier said:

Sorry all - my memory failed me this morning.

(Disgraceful) (Need coffee)

It wasn't the "you" that I was taking issue with originally, it was the "(this) activation" that I think has been poorly defined and has been inconsistently used across cards and rules, where a word precedes the word 'activation' - is it the ship activation being referred to or the squadron activation being referred to? (What I meant when referring to Independence also.)

That'll teach me to sound off without checking and rechecking my argument.

Sorry for the confusion!

I always found the "instead" part to be the most confusing. Do you entirely replace the normal action, such as not activate a squad and just place it? Or do you partially replace the normal action, and place the activated squad so it can shoot but not move?

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

I always found the "instead" part to be the most confusing. Do you entirely replace the normal action, such as not activate a squad and just place it? Or do you partially replace the normal action, and place the activated squad so it can shoot but not move?

Agreed. I think it's well known that I am a proponent of the partial replacement theory.

(I think it was my dissent there that started #teamorange)

It was nice to see that my thought process was echoed by M.Gernes, but the process still required at least one logical leap and a few read in assumptions.

Still not simple or clean.

I want them knooooow

Today?

Most Frequently Asked Question...

"Where is the FAQ?"

EDIT:

Do you think there will be a separate CC FAQ?

Do other FFG games with Campaigns do this or combine their FAQs?

Its getting to be a silly long time again

This is the most Frequently Asked Question, probably we will see it in the next FAQ.

Dairy

On 2/15/2017 at 7:52 AM, CaribbeanNinja said:

Most Frequently Asked Question...

"Where is the FAQ?"

EDIT:

Do you think there will be a separate CC FAQ?

Do other FFG games with Campaigns do this or combine their FAQs?

I think the only other game that this could be compared to is Imperial Assault, and that combines the Campaign and Skirmish FAQs into one document with sections specifically for campaign questions and errata.